Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion => In-progress Highway Systems & Work => Topic started by: froggie on August 17, 2018, 10:58:46 pm

Title: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on August 17, 2018, 10:58:46 pm
By popular demand (i.e. enough private messages), and also because it's less complicated than Mississippi's system (despite the mostly-hidden concurrencies AL routes have underneath the U.S. routes), I've opted to begin work on the Alabama State Routes list.

Primary sources will be the route log located at the end of the ALDOT Annual Report (https://www.dot.state.al.us/ltweb/pdf/ArchivedAnnualReports/2017AnnualReport%20.pdf) (updated annually...linked is the most recent FY 2017 version), and the county-level Milepost maps (https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/milepostmaps/default.htm) (which are typically updated more often than the county-level highway maps).  I also have considerable experience with Alabama, having been to all 67 counties and being stationed twice next door in Mississippi.

Regarding underlying state routes concurrent with U.S. routes, my philosophy is such:  if the underlying route is signed, I will include the segment.  If not signed/it's hidden, I will not include the segment.  So, for example, I will include AL 13 where it's concurrent with US 43 north of Spruce Pine because it's cosigned there, but I will not include AL 13 south of Berry because that's where it goes hidden.  Because of this, the lowest route number I will be including is AL 5.**

(EDIT:) ** - AL 4 is a murky one.  It's supposed to be the hidden concurrency with US 78 across the state, but it's also signed along some of the newer Corridor X segments.  I'm not sure offhand A) whether to include it or not (despite what I mentioned above), or B) what the endpoints of its signing are.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on August 18, 2018, 10:05:13 am
First question-mark area:  the 4-lane connector between I-20/59 Exit 1 and US 11/80 in Cuba.  Officially, it's a hidden segment of AL 8.  But there's very little in the way of signage.  From I-20/59, it's signed as "TO US 80".  At the US 11/80 intersection, there are a few TO I-20/I-59 trailblazers but nothing on the mainline itself leaving the intersection.  And the street blade on the overpass at I-20/59 says "SPUR US 80".

It seems too important of a route connector to not include (it's on the NHS too), but I'm not sure how to mark it, or even if I should include it.  Thoughts from the collaborator masses?
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: yakra on August 18, 2018, 01:51:44 pm
Not signed as part of AL8 itself, I'd say leave it out.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: vdeane on August 18, 2018, 03:04:34 pm
Awesome!  Once this is in preview, there will finally be state route systems on the map for every state I've actually been to, and I'll finally have a .list file free of commented out "speculative" entries.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: mapcat on August 18, 2018, 05:31:44 pm
Not signed as part of AL8 itself, I'd say leave it out.

Agreed.

Thanks for working on this set.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on August 21, 2018, 03:05:31 pm
My next problem area:  what to do with ALT US 78.  As best as I can tell, ALDOT hasn't asked AASHTO to decommission it, but ALDOT does not sign it anywhere anymore.  It's signed only as its underlying routes:  AL 74, US 43, AL 118, and AL 5.  Given our past precedent with unsigned routes, I'm inclined to remove it.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: mapcat on August 21, 2018, 03:24:21 pm
My next problem area:  what to do with ALT US 78.  As best as I can tell, ALDOT hasn't asked AASHTO to decommission it, but ALDOT does not sign it anywhere anymore.  It's signed only as its underlying routes:  AL 74, US 43, AL 118, and AL 5.  Given our past precedent with unsigned routes, I'm inclined to remove it.

Maybe set it for removal when usaal is activated? In similar situations, such as with usasf routes to be moved to the state set, we've left them alone (or extended them) until the new set is activated. Users don't like to lose mileage even with the promise that it will eventually be restored.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: clong on August 21, 2018, 04:35:58 pm
As 1 of those private messengers and a nearly life-long AL resident, I'm glad to see this effort.

I can help with signage questions especially in the Birmingham area and along Interstates 20, 59 and 65 between Birmingham and the Georgia and Tennessee state lines.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on August 21, 2018, 10:35:16 pm
My next problem area:  what to do with ALT US 78.  As best as I can tell, ALDOT hasn't asked AASHTO to decommission it, but ALDOT does not sign it anywhere anymore.  It's signed only as its underlying routes:  AL 74, US 43, AL 118, and AL 5.  Given our past precedent with unsigned routes, I'm inclined to remove it.

Maybe set it for removal when usaal is activated? In similar situations, such as with usasf routes to be moved to the state set, we've left them alone (or extended them) until the new set is activated. Users don't like to lose mileage even with the promise that it will eventually be restored.

However, our past precedent is that we typically remove a route if it's fully unsigned without waiting for "route system" changes.  And this one will affect the US route updates I'm in the process of making as a preliminary step to creating the state routes.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on August 22, 2018, 10:00:08 am
Going to start documenting my known problem areas.  My first one involves AL 126.  This route effectively encompasses BOTH frontage roads along I-65 between Exit 11 and Exit 16, but T's with itself just north of Exit 11 with that spur extending a short ways to the northwest.

Two ways I can think of offhand to handle this one.  First is to begin at the T, run east along the northern frontage road, then back west along the southern frontage road, back through the T, and on to the end of the spur.  This option corresponds to the mileposts as documented in the Montgomery County Milepost map.

The second option would be to split it into two routes, a northern leg and southern leg.  Not sure offhand where I'd put the eastern endpoint of both legs if I use this option.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: yakra on August 22, 2018, 01:12:53 pm
Quote
Given our past precedent with unsigned routes, I'm inclined to remove it.
I agree with this.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on August 22, 2018, 02:41:09 pm
Quote from: clong
I can help with signage questions especially in the Birmingham area and along Interstates 20, 59 and 65 between Birmingham and the Georgia and Tennessee state lines.

My first question for you then:  is AL 378 signed along Finley Blvd yet?
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: clong on August 30, 2018, 01:22:13 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180604/74acd054ab84c1e28fa556a435d18de0.jpg)
This is at the end of the northbound exit ramp of I-65 at Finley Blvd.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180604/939cd42063ce18b9a665f74ee3ed2c7c.jpg)
This is at the end of the west/southbound exit ramp of I-20/59 at Arkadelphia Rd.

Photos courtesy Voyager75 on aaroads
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on August 30, 2018, 05:36:50 pm
Enough for me.  I'll be sure to include it.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on September 13, 2018, 09:59:09 am
Next question for clong or whomever can answer:  is AL 382 signed in Centreville?  According to ALDOT milepost maps, it runs from AL 219 to the east end of the bypass.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: mapmikey on September 14, 2018, 03:01:39 pm
Next question for clong or whomever can answer:  is AL 382 signed in Centreville?  According to ALDOT milepost maps, it runs from AL 219 to the east end of the bypass.

Jan 2017 GMSV shows it signed leaving AL 219:  https://goo.gl/maps/EkN38BUR2ZD2
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on September 14, 2018, 03:05:02 pm
Was hoping there was signage at US 82...but GMSV is too soon for that.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: clong on September 18, 2018, 06:08:17 pm
A user on AA Roads stated that it was signed as of April 2017, but didn't give detail on where the signs were located.
I've messaged for further detail and will pass along if/when I get a response.

If I'm in the neighborhood, I'll swing thru there.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: clong on September 19, 2018, 09:58:06 am
The user on AARoads confirmed that there was a AL382 sign on the US82 end.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on September 22, 2018, 11:09:05 am
In cleaning up the US routes prior to starting the state routes, I've run into a minor quandry with TRUCK US 98 in Mobile.  The way we currently have it in the highway browser, it technically has a concurrency with mainline US 98, though it's missing a point where US 98 turns west from Broad St at Spring Hill Ave.  I believe this was implemented because of signage along eastbound Government St (US 90) approaching Broad St suggesting that TRUCK US 98 begins at Government/Broad.

The question is how to handle the waypoints on the TRUCK 98 list.  Currently, the "western endpoint" is labeled as US98_W even though US 98 technically turns east at this location.  The US 90 waypoint is US98Bro_E here.

I have three ideas on how to handle this for the TRUCK 98 list.  In both cases, the first point is the "western endpoint" at Government/Broad and the second point is where US 98 turns west at Broad/Spring Hill.  Of note is that the US98_W label is currently in use...though it's hard to say whether people thought that meant where it meets US 98 the first time or the physical location at Government/Broad:

Idea 1:
US98_W
US98Bro_W

Idea 2:
US98Bro_E +US98_W
US98Bro_W

Idea 3:
US98Bro_E
US98_W

Thoughts?  Suggestions?
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: vdeane on September 22, 2018, 05:14:54 pm
I like idea 2.  It's a good compromise between capturing the overlap accurately and not breaking .list files.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: yakra on September 23, 2018, 01:11:32 am
Whatever is done here, IMO the existing US98_W label should stay operational (either as the primary or an alternate label).

US98Bro would suggest there's such a US98Bro route in the HB -- US98_BroE and US98_BroW would be closer to the mark, but still miss it, as we don't use street names for these suffixes, just towns. US98_MobE is better in this regard but still a bit confusing, as the whole route is in Mobile. I think the best solution is
US98_A +US98_W
US98_B
...
US98_C

if truncating US98TrkMob isn't appropriate.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on September 23, 2018, 09:12:26 am
I used US98Bro because it's already in use for US 90 and I think better reflects the situation given the additional concurrency just east of the tunnels.  I suppose I could change that but it would also require changing the US 90 labels.  I am not using lettered suffixes as I fully disagree with how Tim implemented them (which seems to have been perpetuated into TM).

All three of the options I came up with continue the use of US98_W as that label is very much in use.  I'm just trying to see if there's a better way to handle this.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: yakra on September 25, 2018, 09:51:03 am
I'd say that all of US90's labels referencing US98 could use a change, so edits would be worthwhile.
Bro and Mob as noted above.
US98Spa_E would look to just wanna be US98_Spa (rather than US98_Spa) by a literal reading of the manual (IE, I have ME US1 ME9_WelE wrong). But it seems that already starting an _A _B _C process back in Mobile, continuing with US98_D would be the way to go.
I10/US98_W and I10/US98_E are interesting. With the unusual intersection layout here, I'm fine with how the point coords worked out. Labels would want to be I-10/98_W and I-10/98_E, or heck, with the way the exits are split up & signed, I-10(35) I-10(35A) I-10(35B) could even work; I rather like that.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: mapmikey on September 25, 2018, 08:31:54 pm
Late to the discussion but...

Why not have the first two points for US 98 Trk just be:

US90
US98_W

The logic would be that the signing of US 98 Trk on Broad St past Springhill to Government is for the benefit of traffic on US 90, as US 98 EB traffic would never get to the Broad/Gov't intersection for accessing US 98 Trk...

This would be the solution if US 98 continued east of Broad with no US 98 Trk (wrong-way) duplex and US 98 Trk were still signed down to US 90.  Why does the solution have to be different since the wrong-way duplex exists?
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on September 28, 2018, 10:58:25 am
Are there any bannered state routes besides BUSINESS AL 21 and TRUCK AL 47? (both in Monroeville)
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: clong on September 28, 2018, 11:39:50 am
I am not aware of any and have looked around at several places around the state that I thought there may be a possibility of one.

We may stumble across others later.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on October 10, 2018, 02:28:54 pm
Two questions from southern Alabama:

- Is AL 100 signed in Andalusia?

- Is AL 302 signed in New Brockton?

GMSV is 5 years old for the former, and too old for the latter (AL 302 designated after New Brockton bypass opened 2 years ago).
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: mapmikey on October 10, 2018, 07:58:10 pm
Two questions from southern Alabama:

- Is AL 100 signed in Andalusia?

- Is AL 302 signed in New Brockton?

GMSV is 5 years old for the former, and too old for the latter (AL 302 designated after New Brockton bypass opened 2 years ago).

There is May 2018 GMSV at each end of AL 100 showing no postings...
https://goo.gl/maps/3aEKN9ovhtL2
https://goo.gl/maps/vSPmu7NEMWP2

There is Apr 2018 GMSV showing AL 302 posted at US 84
https://goo.gl/maps/RytUNB85DMp
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on October 10, 2018, 11:49:49 pm
I'd prefer something more concrete on AL 100, since there are cases where reassurance shields are posted but not trailblazers.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on October 29, 2018, 06:25:20 pm
I've submitted the initial (incomplete) batch of Alabama state routes via a pull request for review as an "in development" system.  Hope I got everything right for that.

This initial push covers from AL 5 to AL 113 and includes any bannered routes in that range (such as TRUCK AL 47 or BUSINESS AL 21).  As noted upthread, I have omitted routes that are not signed, mostly because they are fully concurrent with a U.S. route.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: clong on October 31, 2018, 04:41:24 pm
Thanks for the work.

I'm starting to go thru my traveled routes. I noticed on AL47TrkMon that the endpoints were both labeled AL47_S.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on November 05, 2018, 11:14:46 am
Running into a minor quandary with AL 285.  This route follows the former southern end of AL 165 into Lakepoint Resort State Park.  According to maps (both the Barbour County map and ALDOT's Milepost map), AL 285 ends 1.29 miles south of AL 165...basically at the edge of what ALDOT maps show as the state park boundary.

However, AL 285 is signposted at US 431.  There is no reassurance shield on the route itself there, but there are trailblazers on 431.

Between both June 2014 GMSV and other mapping data, I am unable to locate the exact southern end of AL 285 per ALDOT's data.

So I've decided (unless someone convinces me otherwise) to end AL 285 at US 431.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on November 06, 2018, 09:23:48 am
Need verification on AL 300 southwest of Tuscaloosa.  It runs from US 11/43 to the Fosters interchange on I-20/59 (Exit 62).  GMSV at US 11/43 and along the road is from before the designation, and exit signage hadn't been updated yet on I-20/59 when GMSV went through there.

(EDIT) Same question with AL 301 east of Oxford, which follows old US 431 between I-20 and US 78 before US 431 was rerouted onto I-20 and the Anniston Eastern Bypass.  Much of the GMSV is too old, and the eastbound I-20 exit signage is blocked on this year's GMSV by a semi.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: neroute2 on November 06, 2018, 02:34:51 pm
(EDIT) Same question with AL 301 east of Oxford, which follows old US 431 between I-20 and US 78 before US 431 was rerouted onto I-20 and the Anniston Eastern Bypass.  Much of the GMSV is too old, and the eastbound I-20 exit signage is blocked on this year's GMSV by a semi.
SR 301 is signed on the surface: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6176932,-85.7228001,3a,15y,7.27h,93.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-OoHlg5ggSUQjd3sXOzvnw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D-OoHlg5ggSUQjd3sXOzvnw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D181.7434%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: rlee on November 07, 2018, 08:31:18 pm
Need verification on AL 300 southwest of Tuscaloosa.  It runs from US 11/43 to the Fosters interchange on I-20/59 (Exit 62).  GMSV at US 11/43 and along the road is from before the designation, and exit signage hadn't been updated yet on I-20/59 when GMSV went through there.

(EDIT) Same question with AL 301 east of Oxford, which follows old US 431 between I-20 and US 78 before US 431 was rerouted onto I-20 and the Anniston Eastern Bypass.  Much of the GMSV is too old, and the eastbound I-20 exit signage is blocked on this year's GMSV by a semi.

AL 301 wasn't on the exit signage on I-20 back in March when I took these photos, but it is well signed on both ends.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on November 12, 2018, 04:02:34 pm
Submitted a pull request to add the rest of the Alabama state routes.  Once that's in, and unless I'm missing something, the system should be ready for preview.

I added AL 301 given rlee's photos, but I did not include AL 300 as I have no way yet to verify if it's signed.

Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: Jim on November 12, 2018, 09:42:32 pm
I've made a few fixes and it looks like usaal will be in preview when the site update in progress runs to completion.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on November 13, 2018, 08:26:01 am
There's a problem with the routes that are also in usansf, especially AL 255 which was extended and I included the extension in the usaal version.  How to fix?
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: mapcat on November 13, 2018, 09:58:46 am
See my message in the AL 255 topic.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: cl94 on November 13, 2018, 10:58:22 am
A couple suggestions for AL 281:
- Possibly change "BunLoop" to "CheSP" or "CheStaPk" (Cheaha State Park)? Precedent elsewhere is to use state/national parks as waypoints even if the entrance road has a name (and the name here certainly isn't signed in the field).
- The CR 131 intersection is signed "TO US 431" and, from my drive on it in March, CR 131 is signed as "TO US 431" and "TO AL 281". Possibly change this point to US431 or ToUS431 (with a similar change on US 431)?
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: si404 on November 13, 2018, 11:38:12 am
There's a problem with the routes that are also in usansf, especially AL 255 which was extended and I included the extension in the usaal version.  How to fix?
For routes that are in eursf that are also in a tier 5 system, I've used x banners (or put an x in the number - cf Spanish ones, though I'm going to change that) on the tier 5 routes (eg POL DW902 in poldw (http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?units=miles&u=blank&r=pol.dw902x) vs the eursf version (http://travelmapping.net/hb/?units=miles&u=blank&r=pol.dw902)), when the tier 5 system is activated, I'll remove the route from eursf, and have the x-suffixed version as an AltName if necessary.

It doesn't matter much if they are different lengths, though arguably you'd want them concurrent. I think the GW Parkway question is literally unique - certainly it won't be an issue here.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on November 15, 2018, 04:50:16 pm
Quote
A couple suggestions for AL 281:
- Possibly change "BunLoop" to "CheSP" or "CheStaPk" (Cheaha State Park)? Precedent elsewhere is to use state/national parks as waypoints even if the entrance road has a name (and the name here certainly isn't signed in the field).

Agreed.  I'll change it to "CheStaPark" this evening (standard is to spell out the word if it has 4 letters...i.e. Park).

Quote
- The CR 131 intersection is signed "TO US 431" and, from my drive on it in March, CR 131 is signed as "TO US 431" and "TO AL 281". Possibly change this point to US431 or ToUS431 (with a similar change on US 431)?

Here, the precedent is to use the route number or road name of the connector if one exists.  So in this case, since the connecting road is CR 131 (and was signed as such at one point), I'm leaving it as CR131.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: oscar on November 15, 2018, 04:53:56 pm
Quote
A couple suggestions for AL 281:
- Possibly change "BunLoop" to "CheSP" or "CheStaPk" (Cheaha State Park)? Precedent elsewhere is to use state/national parks as waypoints even if the entrance road has a name (and the name here certainly isn't signed in the field).

Agreed.  I'll change it to "CheStaPark" this evening (standard is to spell out the word if it has 4 letters...i.e. Park).

"SP" is a widely-used abbreviation for "State Park".
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on November 15, 2018, 09:15:20 pm
I prefer writing it out.

BTW, for you Oscar, I happened to notice that you submitted a list update and labeled it as including AL routes.  Saw that you had included some comments including a few point requests:

- I included the AL 13 point but had to label it "CR24_Wal" as I also have a County Rd 24 point in the Florence area.
- I also included the CR728 point on the AL 73 list.
- Boll Weevil Circle around Enterprise is indeed AL 192, but AL 192 is unsigned so for that reason is not included.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: oscar on November 15, 2018, 11:34:17 pm
BTW, for you Oscar, I happened to notice that you submitted a list update and labeled it as including AL routes.  Saw that you had included some comments including a few point requests:

- I included the AL 13 point but had to label it "CR24_Wal" as I also have a County Rd 24 point in the Florence area.
- I also included the CR728 point on the AL 73 list.
- Boll Weevil Circle around Enterprise is indeed AL 192, but AL 192 is unsigned so for that reason is not included.

Thanks! I had meant to make the point requests separately on this forum, but this speeds up the process.

One point label suggestion: the south end of AL 255 is labeled RidRd, for the continuation road. But that doesn't pin down where on Rideout Road the state highway ends, especially since at that point there is no indication of a name change. What is at that point is an entrance sign for the Redstone Arsenal Army base, followed by other signs confirming that you're entering U.S. Government property. Would RedArs be a more informative point label?
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on November 16, 2018, 07:45:27 am
^ I went by road name versus installation, as I recall that being the "standard" that was suggested in the past (Tim?).

And yes, after considerable research, where I placed that point is the endpoint.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: rlee on November 19, 2018, 04:24:54 pm
On US 43/AL 69 in Tuscaloosa at 12th Street, there is a point for LurWalBlvd just on AL 69 just north of I-359 Exit 2, but that point is not on US 43.  On my travels, this results in the section of AL 69 between LurWalBlvd and 9thSt not showing as traveled on AL 69 even though it shows as traveled on US 43.

Will the 4 lane spur route from I-20/59 Exit 1 at Cuba to US 11/80 be left off or designated as something?
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on November 20, 2018, 10:20:15 am
Quote
On US 43/AL 69 in Tuscaloosa at 12th Street, there is a point for LurWalBlvd just on AL 69 just north of I-359 Exit 2, but that point is not on US 43.  On my travels, this results in the section of AL 69 between LurWalBlvd and 9thSt not showing as traveled on AL 69 even though it shows as traveled on US 43.

I did it that way to delineate that US 43 follows the "old streets" (formerly 25th & 26th Aves) and not the I-359 mainline between 12th and 15th.  It was to avoid having a non-matching point at 15th, which is what I otherwise would have had to do.

Though I am open to simplfiying the whole mess by eliminating the LurWalBlvd point and truncating I-359 to 15th.

Quote
Will the 4 lane spur route from I-20/59 Exit 1 at Cuba to US 11/80 be left off or designated as something?

This was discussed upthread.  Short answer is that it will not be included.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on November 25, 2018, 02:06:07 pm
Anyone interested/willing to peer review this system?
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: mapcat on November 25, 2018, 11:31:44 pm
Anyone interested/willing to peer review this system?
If you're willing to do one of mine (PR, AR, LA) in exchange, sure.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: yakra on November 25, 2018, 11:51:48 pm
I plan to add some comment on waypoint labels at least, soon.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: cl94 on November 26, 2018, 02:44:25 pm
I'll try and take a look at it and make comments.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on November 26, 2018, 03:58:29 pm
Quote
If you're willing to do one of mine (PR, AR, LA) in exchange, sure.

I'll consider AR, though it's not exactly a small system.  Smaller than LA, though.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: mapcat on November 26, 2018, 06:12:42 pm
I'll consider AR, though it's not exactly a small system.  Smaller than LA, though.
OK, let me know what you decide.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: the_spui_ninja on December 09, 2018, 09:13:20 pm
AL 135 has been decommissioned; I was there over Memorial Day this year and there was no signage whatsoever.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on December 12, 2018, 12:53:48 pm
As best as I can tell, it has not been decommissioned.  Recent news reports (less than 2 months ago) still used the route's designation in describing a new speed limit where it goes through the state park.

That said, I'll take it out if it can be confirmed that they don't intend to resign it.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: the_spui_ninja on December 13, 2018, 11:38:46 pm
Looking at it again (The StreetView car went through about the same time I did), I can see mile markers but no other signage, which probably means it's still a route but it's not going to be signed (all of the visible signage is pretty recent).

Doesn't hurt to check, though.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: Wadsteckel on December 19, 2018, 08:32:52 pm
Hi Froggie,

Thanks for the Christmas present!  🙂 When I get back home, I’ll be able to add the AL state routes I’ve traversed.

One item to request.  In Mapleville, there is a truck routing for AL22 that uses Foshee Avenue from AL139 to connect to AL22 east of town across the tracks.  Can this be added, or at least the waypoint for the eastern end?  With a semi, I’ll never be able to drive the Main St routing there with 45,000 lbs of paper from South Coast Paper.

Many thanks,
-Ed S
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on December 19, 2018, 08:54:32 pm
^ Is it signed as TRUCK AL 22?  If so, I can add it.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: bhemphill on December 20, 2018, 12:13:55 am
GMSV shows the Truck bannered signs on both ends, but is from 2013.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: mapmikey on December 20, 2018, 06:33:15 am
^ Is it signed as TRUCK AL 22?  If so, I can add it.

Signed on both ends as of 2013 - https://goo.gl/maps/5bE474RbQLu
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on December 20, 2018, 07:23:14 am
I've already seen GMSV.  I'd like to see what his more recent observations are.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: Wadsteckel on December 21, 2018, 07:56:20 pm
As of the last time I was there, a couple months ago, the signs still stand.  Driving a semi, I’m not about to risk not following the signs in the process of clinching a part of a road I don’t have.  😏

Regards,
-Ed S
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: Wadsteckel on January 04, 2019, 10:34:08 pm
Hi Adam,

I was in Maplesville, AL again this week for another load from South Coast Paper.  I came into town via US 82 to AL 22 (thus, entering from the south).  Not only was the Truck AL 22 signs still present, but the sign denoting "Ordinance #82" stating "Thru trucks must follow marked route".  With it raining and me moving, I couldn't get a good picture of the signs.  If you look in Google Maps, they are there where I saw them.

Happy New Year (to everyone)
-Ed S
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: formulanone on April 18, 2019, 07:44:27 am
I've been looking though many of the Alabama State routes, and can't think of too many missing points, other than minor roads that some folks* might use as county-line "spinbacks". But unless there's a reason for the roads to be included, I don't know if every county line waypoint should be included.

As per a PM with froggie at AARoads, I've checked out about 1/3 of the usaal roads point-by-point. So far, nothing looks out of place. I see a good number of connections at all other SR's and many of the longer CRs or local roads.

Unfortunately, I can rarely promise a check them in the field for accuracy, because work takes me all over the country, but I take a ton of photos and browse the ALGIS features for reference.


* Weasel word or self-incrimination?...you be the judge.  ::)
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: formulanone on May 11, 2019, 02:06:08 pm
I'm about 2/3 done - still haven't caught any errors. So far, so good.

Mainly checking to see if one route cross-references another point, and connections between those on the official state maps (which includes a fair number of county routes, where room seems to to permit in some of the less-populated counties).
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: michih on May 11, 2019, 02:43:02 pm
There are about 10 NMPs. Mostly where usaal intersect US routes.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on May 21, 2019, 09:55:46 am
^ Details?
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: michih on May 21, 2019, 02:57:22 pm
Load al.nmp (http://travelmapping.net/logs/nmpbyregion/al.nmp) into HDX (http://courses.teresco.org/metal/hdx/). If you don't wanna / can use HDX, let me know...
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: froggie on May 21, 2019, 02:59:53 pm
Sorry...not in a position to use HDX, hence the ask.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: michih on May 21, 2019, 03:31:12 pm
OK :)
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: oscar on May 21, 2019, 09:05:21 pm
Sorry...not in a position to use HDX, hence the ask.

One other approach is to look at http://travelmapping.net/logs/nmpbyregion/al.nmp, which will show all near-matches in Alabama including many just between non-usaal routes. That's what I use, never having given HDX a try. Disadvantage is that if the mismatch is too big, it won't be a "near miss" and so won't be flagged.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: Markkos1992 on May 22, 2019, 07:00:09 am
Sorry...not in a position to use HDX, hence the ask.

One other approach is to look at http://travelmapping.net/logs/nmpbyregion/al.nmp, which will show all near-matches in Alabama including many just between non-usaal routes. That's what I use, never having given HDX a try. Disadvantage is that if the mismatch is too big, it won't be a "near miss" and so won't be flagged.

The ones that do not get flagged is part of why I have been doing an overhaul of the routes in PA and DE.  I still have not touched HDX to this point.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: Eth on May 22, 2019, 10:46:36 am
AL134 wp US431_N and US431 wp AL134/173 should be synced (btw: why 173 in wp name?)

134 and 173 are concurrent, with 173 ending here. I think that's an artifact of 134 previously running through Headland on Church Street, as I seem to recall it doing maybe 10 years or so ago. (I used to drive this part of US 431 pretty frequently.)

Though by the same token, I suppose that also means AL134's waypoint AL173 should be renamed to AL173_N.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: michih on May 22, 2019, 02:57:00 pm
The ones that do not get flagged is part of why I have been doing an overhaul of the routes in PA and DE.  I still have not touched HDX to this point.

Well, we use the nmp files for exactly this! HDX is used to visualize the NMPs. If there are unintended NMPs even more apart... I think Jim has offered to change the threshold to any desired value. E.g. creating al.nmp with a different threshold just for the check. It's surely quicker checking these point only instead of checking all points.

However, when I review a system, I check NMP file in HDX first, and do another round with checking that all "links" are indicated in HB. Checking all labels of all routes which should have links, that they really have them. If not, coordinates are different and are usually NMPs just with a bigger distance than our standard threshold. In addition, I use this manual check to figure out that the label names are complete - e.g. in case of more than one intersecting route.

There are many way. Just do it the way you think it's the best for you!
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: yakra on May 22, 2019, 08:33:56 pm
Quote
I think Jim has offered to change the threshold to any desired value. E.g. creating al.nmp with a different threshold just for the check.
Another possiblity is adding a commandline argument to use a custom threshold.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: michih on September 14, 2019, 06:29:01 am
There are some LABEL_SELFREF errors: http://travelmapping.net/devel/datacheck.php?sys=null&rg=AL

AL261 wp "CR17/52/91" -> "CR17/52"
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: yakra on September 26, 2019, 09:34:42 pm
I see some confusion on city suffixes when used to disambiguate multiple intersections with same-numbered routes. In these cases, Add a suffix with an underscore and those 3 letters. (http://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/wayptlabels.php) Otherwise, a plain "AL52Opp" or "US98Bro_E" would imply a banner of "Opp" or "Bro", or that they correspond to "AL52Opp" or "US98Bro" in the HB, of which we have none. (In usaal, only AL53Dot has a city abbrev + no banner.)
I ran a search to provide the "Good" examples:
Code: [Select]
yakra@BiggaTomato:~/TravelMapping/HighwayData/hwy_data$ grep _ AL/*/*.wpt | grep -v '_[NEWS] \|_[A-Za-z]\{4\}'
AL/usaal/al.al005.wpt:CR1_Wil http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=31.970868&lon=-87.642113
AL/usaal/al.al013.wpt:CR24_Wal http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.879301&lon=-87.635697
AL/usaal/al.al013.wpt:CR24_Col http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.730195&lon=-87.667809
AL/usaal/al.al041.wpt:AL136_C http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=31.465577&lon=-87.339839
AL/usaal/al.al079.wpt:CR33_Blo http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.947425&lon=-86.585242
AL/usaal/al.al079.wpt:CR33_Jac http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.863796&lon=-86.100765
AL/usaal/al.al095.wpt:CR47_Hen http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=31.406265&lon=-85.138239
AL/usaal/al.al095.wpt:CR47_Bar http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=31.779477&lon=-85.162776
AL/usaal/al.al133.wpt:AL157_Flo http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.801352&lon=-87.651082
AL/usaal/al.al134.wpt:CR55_Hen http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=31.354397&lon=-85.228457
AL/usaal/al.al145.wpt:CR42_Chi http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.014552&lon=-86.609226
AL/usaal/al.al145.wpt:CR42_She http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.122830&lon=-86.541892
AL/usaal/al.al157.wpt:CR24_Col http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.729741&lon=-87.634978
AL/usaal/al.al157.wpt:AL133_Flo http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.801352&lon=-87.651082
AL/usaal/al.al157.wpt:CR24_Lau http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.870770&lon=-87.692174
AL/usaal/al.al239.wpt:CR31_Bar http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=31.884053&lon=-85.503293
AL/usaal/al.al239.wpt:CR31_Bul http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.064024&lon=-85.669815
AL/usaus/al.us029.wpt:AL81_NB http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.423881&lon=-85.690092
AL/usaus/al.us078.wpt:CR35_Fru http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.730925&lon=-85.432756
AL/usaus/al.us080.wpt:AL81_SB http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.423388&lon=-85.690935
AL/usaus/al.us080.wpt:AL81_NB http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.423881&lon=-85.690092
AL/usaus/al.us090.wpt:I-165_End http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=30.699833&lon=-88.045866
AL/usausb/al.us098trkmob.wpt:I-165_End http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=30.699833&lon=-88.045866
Underscores, and city suffixes. Looking good for the most part.

As an aside before moving on, I noticed the _SB and _NB examples, and looked into them. This defies the usual principle of tracing down the "median" of a couplet, and having one point on the intersecting route at that median. There'd be the occasional example for something with really whacked-out geometry, but this is overkill in a straightforward situation like this.
Suggest combining into one point at the existing point (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.423626&lon=-85.690497) where the route traces cross, with AL81_SB as an AltLabel on US80.

Back to the suffix issue, here are the labels that turned up as something in need of attention.
It's possible that some items could have been left out of the search; anything where Alt, Bus, Byp, Trk, Spr or Con referred to a city.
al.al005.wpt: CR29Alb AL25Bibb_S AL25Bibb_N CR29Nau
al.al009.wpt: CR66San CR66Nee
al.al010.wpt: CR7Swe CR23Wil CR65Wil CR7Sau CR65But CR59Luv CR23Bar CR25Hen CR57Hen CR65Hen
al.al014.wpt: CR19Pic CR23Pic CR23Per CR6Per CR37Sel CR19Aut CR6Tal
al.al017.wpt: CR20Was CR34Was CR9Cho CR9Sum CR20Sum CR34Sum CR8Pic CR24Lam CR8Lam CR16Lib CR24Col
al.al021.wpt: CR12Esc CR10Mon CR26Wil CR12Low CR26Low CR7Mon CR29Elm CR10Coo CR49Coo
al.al022.wpt: CR45Dal CR45Chi
al.al025.wpt: CR16Hale CR49Hale CR16Bibb AL5Bibb_S AL5Bibb_N CR49She
al.al033.wpt: CR6Win CR6Law
al.al039.wpt: CR20Sum CR20Gre
al.al041.wpt: CR56Wil CR6Wil CR56Dal
al.al051.wpt: CR11Dale CR2Bar CR2Mac CR11Lee
al.al053.wpt: TN7Truck
al.al055.wpt: CR107Red_S CR107Red_N
al.al069.wpt: CR44Cla CR44Mar
al.al123.wpt: US231Ari
al.al134.wpt: CR1Lev
al.al171.wpt: CR35Ham
al.us011.wpt: CR10Cuba_S CR10Cuba_N CR27Sum CR2York CR19York CR13Liv CR12Liv CR20Epes CR21Epes CR76Bol CR20Bol CR131Eut CR67Ral CR10Fos CR59Tus CR6Arg CR31Cal CR81Col
al.us029.wpt: CR25Rome CR14Ple CR59Luv CR27Bul CR53Tan CR45Cot
al.us031.wpt: CR6Cas CR30Wal CR45Gre CR14Mon CR24Pin CR27Mon CR23Aut CR40Pin CR59Aut CR20Pyr CR23Mid CR59Ver CR24Coo CR47Cla CR50Tho CR42Jem CR33Min CR26Sag CR5Blo CR7Blo CR9Ban CR23Lac
al.us043.wpt: CR84Sal CR6Cor CR10Jac CR16Cla CR35Doy CR16Mar CR47Mar CR20For CR67Ral CR10Fos CR55New CR35Ham CR16Lib
al.us072.wpt: CR24Tus CR71Lau CR33Lim CR71Lim CR33Jac
al.us080.wpt: CR10Cuba_S CR10Cuba_N CR23Dal CR37Sel CR7Low CR23Low CR7Mon CR9Cal CR13Mac CR29Mac
al.us082.wpt: CR35Pic CR30Pic CR49Ref CR16Gor CR47Tus CR30Tus CR1Bib CR16Eol CR29Bib CR16Ada CR15Chi CR1Aut CR10Aut CR29Pra CR22Mon CR15Bru CR22Bul CR35Thr
al.us084.wpt: CR3Cho CR21Cho CR3Cla CR21Cla CR23Zim CR22Wha CR39Cla CR39Mon CR1Per CR23Mon CR15Bel CR35Mon CR43Her CR7Cov CR21Cov CR95Opp AL52Opp CR38Opp CR1Lev CR31Dale CR55Ash
al.us090.wpt: US98Bro_E US98Bro_W US98Mob_W US98Spa_E
al.us098.wpt: US90Bro_E US90Bro_W US90Mob_W US90Spa_E
al.us231.wpt: CR14New AL123Ari CR22Mon CR29Elm CR49Coo CR29Wat CR26Ash CR29Blo CR26Blo CR49Blo
al.us278.wpt: CR49Bea CR35Ham CR49Ham CR57Win CR77Nes CR45Che
al.us280.wpt: CR41She CR41Coo
al.us331.wpt: CR95Opp AL52Opp CR59Mon
al.us411.wpt: CR26Ash CR22Cen CR31Cen
al.us431.wpt: CR12Hen CR137Gle_S CR12Rus CR137Gle_N CR137Pit_S CR137Pit_N CR137Sea_S CR137Sea_N CR137Rus_S CR79Roa
al.us098trkmob.wpt: US98Bro_E US98Bro_W

I have some stuff like this in my regions I need to fix too. The US1Alt labels on ME US1 are a bit dodgy...
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: kjslaughter on September 29, 2019, 11:45:35 pm
Hey guys, I found a naming convention issue on AL 283.  Currently, the south end point is shown as BUS411, but to conform across the site, I think it should be US411BusCen with the route, then banner, then city 1st three letters.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: yakra on September 30, 2019, 01:00:20 am
Or just vanilla US411Bus, as that's the only branch of US411Bus that AL281 intersects.

Heh. The existence of that route looks a bit silly. I guess ALDOT must not be too fond of business state routes, AL21BusMon aside.

Speaking of AL21BusMon, Drewry Road has been relocated southward. In Esri WorldImagery, the scar left over from the old route is pretty freshly visible, heading into the current waypoint.
Suggest one waypoint at the new Drewry Rd intersection, and tweaking the existing waypoint to IvySt, which should be close enough for those who want to mark the old alignment.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: yakra on September 30, 2019, 06:43:31 am
The following labels all have a banner preceding numerals:
AL/usaal/al.al009.wpt: BUS411
AL/usaal/al.al013.wpt: US72/ALT72
AL/usaal/al.al014.wpt: BUS80/22
AL/usaal/al.al017.wpt: US72/ALT72
AL/usaal/al.al022.wpt: BUS80_E
AL/usaal/al.al052.wpt: BUS84_W
AL/usaal/al.al052.wpt: BUS231/431
AL/usaal/al.al052.wpt: BUS84_E
AL/usaal/al.al053dot.wpt: BUS231
AL/usaal/al.al068.wpt: BUS411_W
AL/usaal/al.al283.wpt: BUS411
AL/usaus/al.us029.wpt: TRK29_S
AL/usaus/al.us029.wpt: TRK29_N
AL/usaus/al.us031.wpt: ALT72_W
AL/usaus/al.us031.wpt: ALT72_E
AL/usaus/al.us043.wpt: US72/ALT72
AL/usaus/al.us072.wpt: US43/ALT72
AL/usaus/al.us080.wpt: BUS80/22
AL/usaus/al.us080.wpt: BUS80/41
AL/usaus/al.us082.wpt: TRK29
AL/usaus/al.us411.wpt: BUS411_W
AL/usaus/al.us411.wpt: BUS411_E
AL/usausb/al.us084busdot.wpt: BUS231/431
AL/usausb/al.us231busdot.wpt: BUS84
AL/usausb/al.us231busdot.wpt: BUS431_N
AL/usausb/al.us431busdot.wpt: BUS84
AL/usausb/al.us431busdot.wpt: BUS231_N
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: Griffith on November 21, 2019, 10:20:49 am
AL 14 actually crosses I-65 at exit 181 and goes down Fairview Ave. to US31 than proceeds south to US82. I drove it yesterday.
Title: Re: usaal: Alabama State Routes
Post by: neroute2 on December 06, 2019, 05:51:38 pm
I'd argue that CR6Cas CR30Wal CR45Gre CR14Mon etc. is the correct way to disambiguate same-numbered routes in multiple counties. If disambiguation isn't necessary...probably don't.